Nobody is telling them they can't be gay. They can be as gay as they want to be. Heck, live it up! For tomorrow they die.
We want to prevent them from abrogating the biblical image of marriage into their unbiblical relationships.
Clear enough?
This is where the separation of church and state in the Constitution comes into play. The issue, as I see it, is that you and many others cannot understand the meaning of that. It's both sides of the political aisle that seem to be confused.
If you don't want homosexuals to get married...don't marry them in church. Get me? If the government wants to do it, they can, as per the Constitution.
Honestly, I think it is time that the institution is separated from the government. The issues are how and when to divorce. How assets are divided. How children will be cared for, who pays and how much. The last is the biggest one in my mind. And, if you are telling the truth about not caring what homosexuals do, I don't see an issue with any of this.
Can the church handle these legal matters and how would they? Who would pay for the services churches render?
On the other hand, yes, I know they are not supposed to get married and that what they are doing is sinful and disgusts God. I'm not that naive. What I am doing is compartmentalizing the secular and the religious worlds. I believe what you are telling me is, that is wrong. I can live with being wrong, but I'd like to hear an argument that allows freedom of religion without it being state or U.S. government sponsored. Because, that's what I believe you and others are suggesting.
If that is what you are suggesting, then do we ignore the Constitution as many of our government officials seem to have done? How are we any better then they?
I'll tell you, twenty years ago, I would never have had this opinion. I was pretty much like many of you here. It was black and white for me. Time, life experiences, and a broadening of my knowledge of homosexuality have forced change in my opinions. The latest things I've read are that the proclivity for homosexuality is within one's genes. The newest caveat is that scientists believe that when that is present, if the child's life experiences lean a certain way they will be practicing homosexuals as adults.
I wish I could point to a specific study, but I do not have one to post. I did some reading and heard the opinions of a geneticist who has his doctorate. That was good enough for me. So, I'm pretty torn on this when we look at life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I don't have the legal right to say something won't make them happy. As long as they are not hurting anyone, I don't see an issue.
That position does not include raising children. I don't know enough about that and only have the opinion that it is a bad idea. Though, if someone has the proclivity toward homosexuality, the only thing that might have a chance at stopping that is shame. I don't like shaming anyone. I don't think it is what we should be doing.
So, yes, I am a little stuck. How to handle the separation of church and state and be charitable to all while not sinning by sitting on a fence is quite difficult, and why I am seemingly giving some here such a hard time. Notice, I mainly addressed on person I've told I respect. I think many here have chosen to side with God's law, while forgetting that Christ set the example of how to live. Meaning, as far as I know, he didn't stop anyone from sinning, just invited them to join him and be saved. Make sense?
Neither did He rail against the government, but chose to live His life within the law. Remember, He was not subversive, but railed against the leaders of the Jewish church. Even if you say He rebuked Herod, I say that Herod was the king, supposedly in the line of David, which pretty much makes him the leader of the church, as well. Herod built the temple. Our government does not build churches, and is not supposed to build them. They would have to build for all and tell them what to teach.
So, these are my issues. Struggling, sinful Christian? Okay, I can live with that. Hoping to learn and be enlightened as to why I am wrong? Yes. Asking tough questions? You better believe I will. I think you and a few others can handle the tough questions. Am I wrong?
And, you know what? This thread was about a woman who decided not to do her job at the threat of prison. She stood by her beliefs. What happened? They let her go, but now, when a Muslim is elected and refuses to give your grandson or granddaughter a marriage license due to their beliefs, what happens? Maybe I am too worried about something in the future, but isn't that what everyone of us is doing, worrying about how to best follow God's laws?
I think the government solved it by allowing those who would sign the marriage licenses to do so without Kim's signature present. She is back at work. The issue present then, has been solved; at least temporarily anyway.
In conclusion, I just want to say that if I did hurt anyone's feelings, I am sorry. My intention was not to lead anyone to sin.